Where did these "experts" come from and who are they working for? The Police or Martin's family?

They "work" for the media. . . I read a defense lawyer blog that totally destroyed the credibility of these supposed "voice analyses" based on a single set of recordings. Basically, true voice analysis requires the subject to be tested using specific controlled testing settings, not by using some copy of a copy of a recording. But the media won't report that part when they can, instead, have "breaking news."

Can those 2 "experts" deduce a difference between a screaming bobcat and an african grey parrot perfectly mimicing a screaming bobcat?

A man in distress could sound like a bobcat or an african grey parrot mimicing a bobcat for all it matters.

Lol, sorry you don't like the conclusion that these guys came to but it is what it is. If you're an authority on the issue then you should write the news outlets and inform them these guys may be wrong because of your foolproof bobcat/parrot theory. I'm not fighting for them, just passing along information that some members seem to have not seen yet.

It's entirely likely, and would be unsurprising if the screaming voice was in fact Martin after being shot. But that alone would prove nothing about how and why he was shot.

(Sigh.....)

If you listen to the actual 911 call you will hear the screams for help BEFORE hearing the gunshot.....More reason to let the police and experts do their job instead of speculating or making up theories.

(Sigh.....)
More reason to let the police and experts do their job instead of speculating or making up theories.

You are asking for way to much.

Conjecture and speculation are the cornerstone activity of the internet/human condition mind meld. The internet forum transforms many otherwise reasonable people to the pinnacle of hyperbole, conjecture, logical fallacy, and foot in mouth disease.

Usually there are equally credentialed "experts" on both sides of any case each contradicting the other. High profile cases bring them out from every rock around trying to make a name for themselves and increase their future testimony fees.

"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

As soon as you exit your vehicle to pursue somebody you lose "stand your ground" rights. If anything, Martin was "standing his ground" when he physically confronted Zimmerman. There was no crime occurring, nobody at risk, yet Zimmerman opted to escalate the situation. Chasing after somebody is not "standing your ground".

Do you realize that Zimmerman and other community watch volunteers were told IN PERSON by a police officer that came and met with them PRIOR to this incident to follow and keep an eye on a suspect?

So who do you listen to.

The Officer who provided you with instructions face to face or a Non Officer Dispatcher?

Duh......

Do you really want a bunch of civilians with guns chasing down people they consider "suspicious looking"? You don't see how just "maybe" that could be a bad idea? Military and police are taught NOT to engage with deadly force if it can be avoided. Zimmerman CAUSED a situation. This is what happens when you have people with zero training acting like police.

As soon as you exit your vehicle to pursue somebody you lose "stand your ground" rights. If anything, Martin was "standing his ground" when he physically confronted Zimmerman. There was no crime occurring, nobody at risk, yet Zimmerman opted to escalate the situation. Chasing after somebody is not "standing your ground".

BS! Last time I checked this was a free country and I was allowed to approach ANYONE and ask them ANYTHING!
Walking up to someone and asking them some questions is NOT escalating the situation.
The escalation happened when Martin decided to make the interaction physical by taking a swing at Zimmerman.
I can't wait for all the facts to come out on this. I'll bet anything that Zimmerman will NOT be charged. If he is charged, it will be because of Media Pressure alone and he'll be acquitted later.

"Stand your ground" is for the protection of citizens against aggression.
Zimmerman became the aggressor when he got out of his car. The kid in the hoodie was not breaking any laws. He was under NO legal means required to stop and answer to Zimmerman. Accost me when I am walking in my 'hood and I am going to whoop 'yo ass. And I am an old white redneck!

As soon as you exit your vehicle to pursue somebody you lose "stand your ground" rights. If anything, Martin was "standing his ground" when he physically confronted Zimmerman. There was no crime occurring, nobody at risk, yet Zimmerman opted to escalate the situation. Chasing after somebody is not "standing your ground".

But, then again no one knows that he did chase after him. There were only two witnesses to what happened to lead up to this, and unfortunately one of them is dead.

The real question is whether Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating his head in to the point of it being life threatening as he claims, or whether this was a case of a gun being used to end a common fistfight where no one's life was in danger, or whether Martin was himself the victim of an assault. This is the crux of the whole matter.

__________________"Though defensive violence will always be 'a sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men."-St. Augustine

BS! Last time I checked this was a free country and I was allowed to approach ANYONE and ask them ANYTHING!

No, you can't. Your premise is fundamentally false. A person walking down the street has the right not to be approached/harassed if he's not doing anything wrong. "Looking suspicious" is not a crime. How would you feel if the cops stopped everyone open-carrying a firearm because they "looked suspicious"?

But, then again no one knows that he did chase after him. There were only two witnesses to what happened to lead up to this, and unfortunately one of them is dead.

The real question is whether Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating his head in to the point of it being life threatening as he claims, or whether this was a case of a gun being used to end a common fistfight where no one's life was in danger, or whether Martin was himself the victim of an assault. This is the crux of the whole matter.

Zimmerman began the 911 call in his car. After being told not to follow, he exited his vehicle. End of story. You do NOT exit your vehicle and escalate a situation unless a crime is occurring. And once again, would you want armed people roaming around your neighborhood stopping your kids because they look 'suspicious'? I own guns and am a big believer in self defense, but the key word is "defense". You can't claim "defense" when you escalate a non-violent situation.

Zimmerman began the 911 call in his car. After being told not to follow, he exited his vehicle. End of story. You do NOT exit your vehicle and escalate a situation unless a crime is occurring. And once again, would you want armed people roaming around your neighborhood stopping your kids because they look 'suspicious'?

No, it's not "end of story" Thank you, but it isn't up to you when the debate ends.

You seem to be saying that the fact he exited his truck means he deserved absolutely whatever befell him afterwords. I disagree. I don't know what happened after he exited the truck, I am simply saying he still retained a right to defend himself, if indeed that's what he did. I don't know for sure what happened, and neither does anyone else.

__________________"Though defensive violence will always be 'a sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men."-St. Augustine

You seem to be saying that the fact he exited his truck means he deserved absolutely whatever befell him afterwords. I disagree. I don't know what happened after he exited the truck, I am simply saying he still retained a right to defend himself, if indeed that's what he did. I don't know for sure what happened, and neither does anyone else.

So if you pick a fight and lose you have the right to shoot somebody? It's irresponsible people like Zimmerman that cause the rest of us to lose our rights. Zimmerman is a civilian. Meaning he can report a "suspicious person" and then wait for the police. You cannot have armed civilians out confronting people just because they look suspicious. By confronting somebody you're executing an "arrest". Civilians do not have the right to arrest and question people. And the reason? Because you get exactly what happened in FL. People escalating situations with no training on how to manage those situations. Neighborhood watch officers do not have authority to arrest/detain/question. Again, end of story.